Association of Accrediting Agencies of Canada

Association of Accrediting Agencies of Canada The Accreditation Bulletin 1

One of the most important reasons why accreditation systems are established is to encourage continual improvement in education. I m sometime asked do you mean continuous improvement? Not really. "Continual improvement" and "Continuous improvement" are often used interchangeably, but there are subtle differences. According to Merriam-Webster, continual often implies a close prolonged succession or recurrence. It implies intervals where there are interruptions. Continuous usually implies an uninterrupted flow or spatial extension. So, why should this matter? If we re linguists or English scholars it matters. As accreditors, as long as we think about how the process should develop, the adjective is not a deal-breaker. If we re looking for a system that is in a constant state of driving process improvements, we re developing a continuous improvement process. This kind of process involves constant incremental improvement within the current system. Continual improvement means going through process improvements in stages. The stages are separated by interruptions. These interruptions might be necessary to understand if the improvements did actually help achieve the desired outcomes. Which takes me to one of the most valuable benefits of being a member of AAAC: the opportunity to understand how changes did (or did not) improve our systems. Members get the chance to exchange ideas with colleagues who get it because of the many similarities between different accreditation systems. When you try to have a conversation with your partner about the challenges of visitor training, you may get a blank stare. However, bring this up with a colleague from AAAC and you ll get a nod (or a knowing smile) and most likely some useful pointers. In the coming year, AAAC members will be working together on improving the online training program, improving members access to shared resources and on professional development for members. Your Board of Directors will lead on these initiatives (and others) but for these changes to deliver improvements, we will be drawing on the experience and knowledge of all AAAC members. And once we ve had a chance to evaluate how well we ve done, guess what? We take a brief pause before we get to keep improving some more! Lynn Villeneuve The Accreditation Bulletin 1

Since joining the Board last year, I have had the privilege of working with an amazing group of people who give of their time, energy and expertise in overseeing the management of AAAC. The ability to share experiences and best practices with your colleagues represents a unique opportunity. Last May, members came together to review and update our Strategic Plan. Thanks to Deborah Wolfe for taking the lead role in helping AAAC in this important exercise. The members who were present provided excellent feedback and this provided the Board of Directors with a clear picture to shape the future direction of AAAC. More is being written about the value of accreditation. Hardly a day goes by when another story of a postsecondary institution appears in the news. This has affected the way we operate, by forcing us to review Policies, juggle priorities and spend more time getting things right. One concern I keep hearing is the lack of resources needed to help carry out accreditation activities. This can be a huge burden on smaller organizations and effective strategies and planning are required in order to remain sustainable. Training continues to be a top priority and it should be. I spent a fair amount of time this past year looking into new software. Accreditation Management Systems (AMS) remain out-of-reach for most organizations forcing most of us to do what we can with what we have. One major disadvantage in the development of any software is the relatively small number of accrediting bodies in Canada. This makes custom software applications very expensive to develop. However, I am optimistic that an affordable solution can be found in the near future. Accreditation is all about ensuring quality education. That is after all, why we accredit in the first place. I express my sincere appreciation to my fellow Board members for their dedication, hard work and professionalism. I would also like to thank Lynn Burgess and staff at Megram for the great work they do in the administration of AAAC. Isidore (Issy) LeBlond FCSC, CSP Lorry Fortin Issy LeBlond Lynn Villeneuve The Accreditation Bulletin 2

It looks like summer is finally here! Perfect timing too; fresh out of our annual face to face meetings rejuvenated with new ideas and a new board. For those of you who did not attend the meetings, this year s professional development workshops were lively and very informative. From developing new committees to learning about accreditation management tools, there was something for everyone. It really is heartwarming to see the members all come together as a cohesive network sharing resources and ideas. It has been a very productive year under the leadership of Issy and with the support of the outgoing board members. The committees, under the leadership of Gina, Deborah and Lynn were committed to developing useful tools and resources for all AAAC members including an updated website, a revised and more up to date best practices document, a welcome package for new members and an up to date policy manual. I want to remind all members that AAAC s second biggest source of revenue is the online training program and I encourage you to have your staff and colleagues take the course either as a refresher or provide it to new members of your accreditation teams. Some of you met Amy Robinson at the AGM in Ottawa; Amy is the newest member of the management team at Megram who will be working with the AAAC Board on strategic matters and responding to member queries. While my in-box is always open to receiving your requests, Amy will be managing most of the day to day questions and I will leave you in her most capable hands. Have a fabulous summer! Lynn Burgess What an honour it was to meet so many wonderful people at the April Meeting of Members. I was truly impressed by the capacity of the board to creatively work in collaboration with all the members present to establish common goals and objectives and rank them in order of importance. I am very excited to have the opportunity to be a part of AAAC and look forward to working with you all to accomplish some great new things this year. Amy Robinson The Accreditation Bulletin 3

The Annual General Meeting of Members was held in Ottawa on April 16th, 2015 with nineteen members in attendance. The meeting was chaired by the outgoing Chair, Issy LeBlond, who thanked the board for their dedication and hard work over the past year. The newly elected AAAC Board members for 2015 are: Chair: Lynn Villeneuve, Engineers Canada Past Chair: Issy LeBlond, Canadian Technology Accreditation Board Vice Chair: Aline Gagnon, Canadian Medical Association Treasurer: Kathy Davidson, Physiotherapy Education Accreditation Canada Member-at-Large: David Parkes, Diver Certification Board Canada Member-at-Large: Deborah Wolfe, Federation of Law Societies of Canada We are always looking for interesting articles or suggestions for upcoming newsletters. Please send your ideas to Amy at Amy@megram.com From left to right David Parkes, Deborah Wolfe, Kathy Davidson, Aline Gagnon, Lynn Villeneuve and Issy LeBlond The Accreditation Bulletin 4

On April 16th, Deborah Wolfe facilitated a comprehensive and interactive workshop that generated a multitude of relevant ideas and priorities. Members were asked to prioritize areas of importance that were then categorized under the current committees of AAAC. Priorities by Committee Liaison 1. Membership Surveys 2. Internal Relations 3. Promotion/Advance of Accreditation 4. Membership Recruitment, benefits of membership 5. Attendance at Conference and Report back Communication 1. Consult with members regarding format frequencies, location of annual meetings and guest speakers 2. Content of meetings, web professional development, guest speaker 3. Searchable and sortable database of members, Q& A repository, surveys 4. Should the newsletter be e-blasted or member driven? 5. Job shadowing 6. Determine communication options between board and members/ members and all members 7. Special interest groups of AAAC 8. Communicate board activities to members Other 1. Online training program (surveyor training, enhance/develop, tailor online training) 2. Member resources repository These priorities will be assigned to the 2015 committees that were established. The committees are: Resources Chair: Deborah Wolfe Members: Carla DiGironimo, Lynn Villeneuve Professional Development Chair: Aline Gagnon Members: Laura Sheehan There is still room for members on the committees! Contact any of the chairs listed above or Amy at amy@megram.com if you are interesting in participating. Online Training Program/Shared Training Resources Chair: David Parkes Members: Alex Topps, Lorry Fortin, Murray Russell, Joni Boyd, Kathy Davidson The Accreditation Bulletin 5

At the recent AAAC professional development workshops held in Ottawa, Lorry Fortin shared her working knowledge and examples of the CTAB Custom Database that is used to track accreditation statuses. She reported that CTAB has: 180 active accredited programs 43 different campuses (nationally and internationally) 14 different disciplines With that many programs to oversee, Lorry developed some in-house custom designed tools including: CTAB Custom Database this database keeps track of all relevant educational agency information including the program, original date of accreditation, next review date, follow up required and the details of the accreditation cycle. Program Evaluator Profile this tracking tool keeps all necessary profile information on the volunteer program evaluators including their skill set and level of expertise, previous accreditation experience and if they have an interest or are available to travel if required. Master Tracking Tool-Active Program Working Sheet - all details relevant to each program during a triennial review period are kept on this work sheet including renewal payments, submission material, review teams and logistics, endorsement process and notification to the educational agency. On May 25 th, 2015 Lorry presented the inaugural AAAC webinar showcasing CTAB s data monitoring tool using Microsoft Excel 2007, with a focus on the following tools: - Filters - Groups - Conditional Formatting - Pivot Tables The Accreditation Bulletin 6

The University of Ottawa is at risk of losing accreditation for its residency program in neurosurgery unless it addresses major weaknesses within two years. The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada gave the university notice of intent to withdraw accreditation in a letter last month. The letter, sent to Dr. Lorne Wiesenfeld, vice-dean of postgraduate medical education, and assistant dean Dr. Alan Chaput, lists 10 weaknesses of the program and just three strengths. In an interview Monday, Wiesenfeld expressed confidence that the university s Department of Surgery can correct the program deficiencies identified by the royal college. Am I worried that we will not have a residency program in two years? he said. I m not worried at all. A notice of intent to withdraw accreditation is not a horribly uncommon thing, Wiesenfeld said. Even so, It s not something to be brushed aside or dismissed. These are things that need to be addressed, he said. A notice of intent to withdraw accreditation is given when there is major and/or continuing non-compliance with one or more standards which calls into question the educational environment and/or integrity of the program, the royal college s letter says. The notice triggers a mandatory external review of the program, which must occur no later than April 1, 2017. The royal college will arrange the review in consultation with the university, its letter says, at such time as you feel the weaknesses of the program have been corrected. At that time, the program will be required to show why accreditation should not be withdrawn. The six-year neurosurgery residency program is one of 10 training programs operated by the university s Department of Surgery. According to the university s website, its primary goal is to train neurosurgeons so they are capable of dealing with the broad range of problems encountered in neurosurgical practice. report, a residents report, a program questionnaire and the recommendation of a special committee. There are currently about a dozen residents, including some foreign doctors, in the neurosurgery program. Their residency work takes place at The Ottawa Hospital. Wiesenfeld met with many of the residents after receiving the royal college s letter. The residents think there are many changes that have been happening and there s work to be done, but they re optimistic. The program weaknesses listed in the royal college s letter include Concern the program doesn t allow residents to take on increasing responsibility in the operating room, due to lack of delegation by faculty. An insufficient number of pediatric cases to satisfy the specialty requirements. Potentially inadequate exposure to functional neurosurgery, such as epilepsy. Commitments to patients that prevent residents from attending some components of the educational program. Concerns about faculty engagement in teaching. Resident teaching is not fully assessed. Mid-rotation assessments are not completed for rotations of less than four months. The strengths of the program, the royal college says, include a dedicated and experienced program director, an effective program administrator and a strong, structured research program that supports and encourages residents scholarly activities. Wiesenfeld said he would be more concerned if the royal college had raised concerns about harassment or patient safety in its notice of intent to withdraw accreditation. But neither of those were flagged as issues. Some of the identified weaknesses should be fairly easy to address, he said. Moreover, the division of neurosurgery has had new leadership since last July. They re very engaged and looking forward to rebuilding and reinvigorating the division. In deciding to issue notice of intent to withdraw accreditation, the royal college says consideration was given to an internal review The Accreditation Bulletin 7

Initial teacher education what people learn to become teachers is undergoing significant and exciting change in Ontario. To continue the accreditation of teacher education programs, the Ontario College of Teachers, the profession s regulator, has developed a unique verification process. We ve adopted an approach that streamlines the existing process and continues to protect the public interest, says Janis Leonard, the College s Manager of Accreditation. On September 1, 2015, the initial teacher education program at Ontario s faculties of education will expand to four semesters and include at least twice the amount of practice teaching time (a minimum of 80 days, up from 40) and greater attention to students mental health and wellbeing, how to teach with technology and diversity, among other core elements. The Ontario College of Teachers has taken a lead role to develop the program requirements and is working with the faculties to help implement the program and with the provincial government to make necessary legislative changes. To guide and implement the large-scale program change, the College developed an accreditation resource guide in consultation with the Ministry of Education and the faculties. We ve worked closely with the Ministry of Education and the faculties to develop an enriched program to prepare teachers for the demands of teaching and learning in the contemporary context. says College CEO and Registrar Michael Salvatori, OCT. These requirements ensure that all applicants certified by the College meet Ontario s high standards for excellence in teaching that our students deserve. Acting in the public interest, the College sets the ethical and practice standards for teachers and accredits teacher education programs and approves eligible providers based on those standards. In addition to licensing teachers, the College regulates teaching qualifications, investigates complaints involving members and takes appropriate disciplinary action. Continued...2 Start making plans for the annual INQAAHE forum to be held May 22nd 27 th, 2016 in Fiji, Suva and the 2017 INQAAHE conference that will take place in Bahrein, Manama. Visit www.inqaahe.org for more information. The Accreditation Bulletin 8

Typically, new education programs are renewed after two classes have graduated. Existing programs are reviewed every seven years. Because the enhanced teacher education program affects all 17 faculties of education at once, the College has suspended its accreditation reviews to provide faculties with time and resources to implement their program changes. The interim system is a paper-review process without a panel or site visit based on the programs reporting and attesting changes from the findings in their last decision. Each accredited faculty program will submit a report by March 1, 2016 demonstrating how their program has changed or been adapted to satisfy the new enhancements. The approach provides a balance of trust for established faculties while ensuring that the College continues to protect the public interest. This is a temporary process to continue the accreditation of programs until their next scheduled full review. The normal accreditation review schedule will resume in March 2016. The College has developed a Verification Report for Ontario Initial Teacher Education Program Providers to make the verification process as efficient and streamlined as possible. The report reflects the new program s duration, extended practicum, and new program elements. It looks at course credits and weighting, the faculty s practicum handbook, and features an alignment chart that shows where new core content has been embedded. The Accreditation Committee will review each verification report and issue a decision that is available publicly. The decision will indicate any conditions required for program accreditation to continue. In the next scheduled accreditation review, each faculty will prepare a self-study for review by an accreditation panel. The panel will visit the site to verify the data in the self-study and write a report with a recommendation to the Accreditation Committee, which would then issue a decision as to whether that program qualified for accreditation. The process normally takes six months. Typically, three to five accreditation reviews are conducted on every year. For more information about the changes or the process, please contact Janis Leonard, OCT, at jleonard@oct.ca. The Accreditation Bulletin 9

Technology Accreditation Canada (TAC), a recently launched, new accreditation model for the engineering technology and applied science profession, is the brainchild of Technology Professionals Canada (TPC), a partnership of provincial technology associations in Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia which together represent approximately 85 per cent of the technology profession in Canada. TPC commissioned the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) to undertake a third-party evaluation and recommend a state-of-the-art accreditation process. CSA performed a comprehensive, independent review of technology accreditation practices that existed at the time measured against best practices from other jurisdictions and sectors. It conducted extensive national consultations across the country including western Canada, Ontario and the Maritimes with numerous college deans and other stakeholders providing input. CSA s report identified opportunities for enhancement in the accreditation system, including clear, auditable processes and documentation, standards development, and training of auditors. Based on the recommendations of this December 2011 CSA report, TPC established a provisional committee which resulted in the creation of TAC. The TAC process is based on objective documentation, competency definition/measurement and quality assessment, and ensures auditor competency through specialized training, testing and monitoring. Accreditation decisions are based on the findings of the auditors and not by board vote. A secondlevel review of each individual accreditation and annual reviews by TAC s governance and audit council guarantee consistency and integrity in TAC national accreditation. Auditor training is one of the key distinguishing features of TAC. TAC uses an online six-module course. Auditors must successfully complete a test after each module as well as achieve a grade of at least 85 per cent on the overall test. The training is recognized by the Engineering Institute of Canada (EIC), as well as all TPC-affiliated provincial associations, for two continuing education units (CEUs). TAC utilizes a 200-page manual to train its auditors. Auditors must have participated as auditors-in-training before being assigned as full auditors on an accreditation. TAC benefits from a cohesive governance structure that includes a board of directors, governance and audit council (GAC), standards council, and a standards development council all comprised of dedicated and expert volunteers and registrars. The board of directors includes representation from academia and industry and is responsible for oversight of all TAC activities. In addition to conducting the second level review of audits, the standards council -- which also has representation from academia -- prescribes processes and procedures for setting the standard by which engineering technology and applied science programs will be audited. TAC is pleased to become a member of the Association of Accrediting Agencies of Canada and looks forward to participating in its activities, said Sam DiGiandomenico, TAC executive director. Incorporated in 2013, TAC successfully completed its pilot accreditation and is in the process of accrediting other college programs. Please visit the TAC website: www.technologyaccreditation.ca The Accreditation Bulletin 10

Aline Gagnon showcased the process of CMA accreditation at the recent professional development workshop held in April in Ottawa. She explained how the conjoint accreditation process contributes to the delivery of high quality, safe and effective patient care by upholding national standards for the education of health professionals who support physicians in the clinical setting. Strengths of the CMA process include: Evidence based Emphasis on outcomes Quality and diversity of the survey teams Clear requirements Involves stakeholders consultations Rigor and transparency Cooperative approach Less prescriptive Successfully applied across professions Aline explained that at each step of the accreditation process, problems are defined, actions are identified and measures are then executed. See more about the CMA accreditation process here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqrx8y8lofa Join the Advisory Services Webinar offered by Accreditation Canada June 30, 2015 1:00 2:00 pm EDT 10:00 11:00 am PDT Need to further your accreditation and quality improvement initiatives? Advisory Services can help! During this FREE one-hour session, you will hear from a client organization that has worked with Advisory Services to achieve its goals. Join us to learn how Expert Advisors can offer strategic guidance and help you: Build capacity Conduct a pre-survey evaluation Address post-survey recommendations For more information, contact Nancy Viljean at 1-800-814-7769 1-800-814-7769 FREE x 317 or nancy.viljean@accreditation.ca Accreditation.ca The Accreditation Bulletin 11

Association of medicine faculties found undergraduate program failed to meet 24 of 132 required standards McGill University's prestigious medical school is on probation and at risk of losing its accreditation after an inspection found the undergraduate medical education program failed to meet 24 of 132 required standards. The Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada is the body responsible for accrediting medical schools. In a letter to staff and students, McGill's dean of medicine, David Eidelman, explained that after a twoday visit in February, the association found that McGill's faculty failed to meet several criteria. Eidelman said some criteria were administrative in nature. "The day that they came we did not yet have signatures on all the contracts of affiliation with the hospitals, which we got about a week later," he said, adding that some other standards that were not met were more "substantial." "Questions about the way we are tracking the curriculum to make sure that all students were getting an equivalent experience no matter which hospital they were in. To me, that's a much more important issue which speaks to the way the operations of the curriculum are done." Students not affected Eidelman explained the process to staff, students and residents at a special meeting Wednesday evening. Eidelman suggested that the problems are partly due to the fact that the program is in the midst of introducing a new curriculum. He said that inspectors from the association were evaluating both the old curriculum and the new one. "One thing that we were happy about was that when the visitors came, they made a point of commenting on how innovative our new curriculum was...there's a difference between the content of the curriculum and the details of how we're implementing it," Eidelman said. This marks the first time that McGill's medical faculty has been placed on probation. Cont d 2 The faculty now has 18 to 24 months to demonstrate significant progress or it could risk losing its accreditation. The Accreditation Bulletin 12

"There's no excuse for being on probation, so any explanation is not an excuse but there is no question that trying to run two different curriculums at the same time, while moving a hospital and having a health-care reform is a very challenging set of circumstances, and I can't help but think that made our job harder," Eidelman said. He stressed that students would not be affected by McGill's probationary status. "It means nothing for students. Their education is fully accredited, and their diplomas will be recognized around the world." Medical students said they support McGill. "It's not the greatest news but most of the students have faith in the faculty. Our new curriculum was even considered a strength by the accreditors," said Doulia Hamad, president of the Medical Students' Society. Eidelman said the university has already formed a working group on accreditation, and that group has developed an action plan. He said most of the measures in the action plan will be implemented by the end of this year. McGill Dean of Medicine David Eidelman says the university is already taking steps to address problems listed by the Association of Canadian Faculties of Medicine. (CBC) Joseph Vibert, the Executive Director of the Association of Specialized and Professional Accreditors provided an update at the annual meeting in April to members about the recent activities of ASPA. Visit aspa-usa.org for more information. The Accreditation Bulletin 13

Association des Agences d Agrément du Canada The Accreditation Bulletin 14

Un des objectifs primordiaux de l établissement des systèmes d agrément est d encourager l amélioration continuelle dans l éducation. On me demande parfois : «Vous voulez dire l amélioration continue?» Pas tout à fait. Les termes «amélioration continuelle» et «amélioration continue» sont souvent employés de façon interchangeable, mais il existe une nuance subtile entre les deux. D après le Grand Robert, «continuel» a souvent la connotation d une répétition à intervalles rapprochés, ce qui implique une alternance entre l action et l interruption, tandis que «continu» implique généralement un ensemble de parties non séparées, ininterrompues, dans l espace ou dans le temps. Quelle importance alors? Pour les linguistes et les terminologues, ces nuances sont importantes. Pour nous, les accréditeurs, tant qu il s agit de réfléchir à la façon de développer le processus, on ne montera pas aux barricades sur le choix de l adjectif. Si nous recherchons un système constamment en état d animer l amélioration des processus, nous élaborons un processus d amélioration continue. Ce genre de processus consiste à apporter constamment des améliorations incrémentielles au système actuel. L amélioration continuelle signifie qu on procède à l amélioration des processus par stades. Ces stades sont séparés par des interruptions, qui sont parfois nécessaires pour vérifier si les améliorations ont vraiment contribué à l atteinte des résultats souhaités. Ceci m amène à parler de l un des plus précieux avantages de l adhésion à l AAAC : la possibilité de comprendre en quoi les changements ont amélioré (ou pas) nos systèmes. Les membres ont l occasion d échanger des idées avec des collègues qui savent de quoi il est question, en raison des nombreuses similitudes entre les divers systèmes d agrément. Quand vous essayez de discuter avec votre partenaire des défis associés à la formation des visiteurs, vous risquez de vous heurter à une absence totale de réaction. Mais parlez-en à une ou un collègue de l AAAC, et cette personne vous répondra par un hochement de tête (ou un sourire entendu) et, plus souvent qu autrement, par quelques trucs utiles. Au cours de la prochaine année, les membres de l AAAC vont travailler ensemble à l amélioration du programme de formation en ligne, à la bonification de l accès des membres aux ressources partagées et au perfectionnement professionnel des membres. Votre conseil d administration prendra la direction de ces initiatives (et de plusieurs autres), mais pour que ces changements se traduisent par des améliorations, nous puiserons dans l expérience et le savoir de tous les membres de l AAAC. Et une fois que nous aurons eu l occasion d évaluer notre performance, devinez quoi! Nous allons faire une brève pause avant de nous remettre à apporter des améliorations! Lynn Villeneuve Le Bulletin d Accréditation 1

Depuis mon entrée au conseil d administration l an dernier, j ai eu le privilège de travailler avec un groupe de personnes formidables qui consacrent leur temps, leur énergie et leur expertise à la supervision de l administration de l AAAC. La possibilité d échanger des expériences et des pratiques exemplaires avec des collègues représente une occasion unique. En mai dernier, les membres se sont réunis pour examiner et mettre à jour notre plan stratégique. Je tiens à remercier Deborah Wolfe d avoir pris la direction de cet exercice important et des plus utiles pour l AAAC. Les membres présents ont offert une excellente rétroaction, qui a donné au conseil d administration un tableau précis en vue d établir l orientation future de l AAAC. On peut lire de plus en plus d écrits sur la valeur de l agrément. Presque quotidiennement, un établissement d enseignement postsecondaire fait la manchette. Cette situation a eu une incidence sur notre mode de fonctionnement en nous forçant à revoir nos politiques, à jongler avec nos priorités et à passer davantage de temps à faire les choses autrement. Une des préoccupations dont j entends le plus souvent parler concerne l insuffisance des ressources pour la réalisation des activités d agrément. Ce processus est parfois un lourd fardeau pour les organismes de petite taille, qui ont besoin de bonnes stratégies et d une planification efficace pour demeurer viables. La formation demeure une priorité absolue, comme il se doit. Depuis un an, j ai passé beaucoup de temps à examiner de nouveaux logiciels. Les systèmes de management de l agrément demeurent hors de portée de la plupart des organismes, ce qui nous force généralement à «faire ce qu on peut avec ce qu on a». Un des principaux inconvénients associés au développement d un logiciel, quel qu il soit, est le nombre relativement restreint d organismes d agrément au Canada, qui rend très onéreux le développement d applications logicielles sur mesure. Je demeure toutefois optimiste quant à la découverte d une solution abordable dans un proche avenir. L agrément consiste essentiellement à assurer un enseignement de qualité. C est d ailleurs pour cela que nous décernons l agrément au départ. Je tiens à exprimer sincèrement toute mon estime pour mes collègues administrateurs, qui font preuve de dévouement, d ardeur au travail et de professionnalisme. Je veux également remercier Lynn Burgess et le personnel de Megram de leur excellent travail pour l administration de l AAAC. Lorry Fortin Issy LeBlond Lynn Villeneuve Isidore (Issy) LeBlond FDCC, CSP Le Bulletin d Accréditation 2

On dirait que l été va finir par s installer! Le moment est idéal; nous venons de terminer nos réunions annuelles en personne et nous sommes revigorés par des idées nouvelles et un nouveau conseil. Pour ceux et celles d entre vous qui n ont pas assisté aux réunions, disons que les ateliers de perfectionnement professionnel se sont avérés aussi animés qu informatifs. De la mise sur pied de nouveaux comités à l information sur les outils de gestion de l agrément, tout le monde y a trouvé son compte. Il est vraiment gratifiant de voir tous ces membres se réunir et former un réseau cohésif d échange de ressources et d idées. Ce fut une année très productive sous la gouverne d Issy LeBlond et avec l appui des administrateurs sortants. Les comités, sous la direction de Gina van Dalen, Deborah Wolfe et Lynn Burgess, se sont engagés à élaborer des outils et ressources utiles pour tous les membres de l AAAC, y compris un site entièrement mis à jour, une version révisée et actualisée du document des meilleures pratiques, une trousse d accueil pour les nouveaux membres et un manuel des politiques mis à jour. Je tiens à rappeler à tous les membres que la deuxième source de revenus en importance de l AAAC est le programme de formation en ligne. Je vous encourage à faire suivre le cours par votre personnel et vos collègues à titre soit de cours de perfectionnement, soit de formation initiale aux nouveaux membres de vos équipes d agrément. Lors de l AGA à Ottawa, certains d entre vous ont fait la connaissance d Amy Robinson, la nouvelle recrue de l équipe de gestion de Megram, qui s occupera des questions stratégiques avec le conseil de l AAAC et répondra aux questions des membres. Ma boîte de réception demeure toujours ouverte à vos demandes, mais c est Amy Robinson qui traitera la plupart des questions habituelles; je vous confie donc à ses soins des plus attentifs. Je vous souhaite un merveilleux été! Lynn Burgess Quel honneur ce fut pour moi que de rencontrer tant de gens formidables à l Assemblée des membres tenue en avril! J ai été vraiment impressionnée par la capacité du conseil à travailler d une façon créative avec tous les membres présents afin d établir des buts et objectifs communs et de les classer par ordre d importance. Je suis très enthousiaste à l idée d avoir la possibilité de faire partie de l AAAC, et j ai bien hâte de collaborer avec vous tous pour accomplir de nouvelles et grandes choses cette année. Amy Robinson Le Bulletin d Accréditation 3

L assemblée générale annuelle des membres a eu lieu à Ottawa le 16 avril 2015; dix-neuf membres y ont assisté. L assemblée était présidée par le président sortant du conseil, Issy LeBlond, qui a remercié les administrateurs de leur dévouement et de leur ardeur au travail au cours de l année écoulée. Les administrateurs nouvellement élus au conseil de l AAAC pour 2015 sont : Présidente: Lynn Villeneuve, Ingénieurs Canada Ancien président: Issy LeBlond, Bureau canadien d agrément de la technologie Vice-présidente: Aline Gagnon, Association médicale canadienne Trésorière: Kathy Davidson, Agrément de l enseignement de la physiothérapie au Canada Administrateur: David Parkes, Diver Certification Board Canada Administratrice: Deborah Wolfe, Fédération des ordres professionnels de juristes du Canada Nous sommes toujours à l affût de suggestions ou d articles intéressants pour les prochaines éditions du Bulletin. Prière de faire parvenir vos idées à Amy Robinson, à l adresse amy@megram.com De gauche à droite : David Parkes, Deborah Wolfe, Kathy Davidson, Aline Gagnon, Lynn Villeneuve et Issy LeBlond Le Bulletin d Accréditation 4

Le 16 avril, Deborah Wolfe a animé un atelier exhaustif et interactif qui a généré une multitude d idées pertinentes et de priorités. On a demandé aux membres de classer par ordre de priorité les dossiers importants, qui ont ensuite été répartis entre les comités actuels de l AAAC. Autres 3. Programme de formation en ligne (formation des inspecteurs, optimisation et développement, formation en ligne personnalisée) 4. Référentiel des ressources offertes aux membres Dossiers prioritaires, par comité Liaison 6. Sondages auprès des membres 7. Relations internes 8. Promotion et avancement de l agrément 9. Recrutement, avantages de l adhésion 10. Participation au congrès et production de rapport Communications 9. Consultation des membres concernant le format et la fréquence des communications, l emplacement des assemblées annuelles et les conférenciers 10. Contenu des assemblées, perfectionnement professionnel sur le Web, conférencier 11. Base de données des membres avec fonctions de consultation et de tri, foire aux questions, sondages 12. L infolettre devrait-elle être transmise par publipostage électronique ou à l initiative de chaque membre? 13. Jumelage 14. Détermination des options de communications entre le conseil et les membres ainsi qu entre chaque membre et l ensemble des membres 15. Groupes d intérêt particulier de l AAAC 16. Communication des activités du conseil aux membres Programme de formation en ligne / Ressources de formation partagées Président : David Parkes Membres : Alex Topps, Lorry Fortin, Murray Russell, Joni Boyd Ces priorités seront assignées aux comités qui ont été établis pour 2015. Les comités sont : Ressources Présidente : Deborah Wolfe Membres : Carla DiGironimo Perfectionnement professionnel Présidence : À déterminer Membres : Laura Sheehan Il reste de la place pour des membres au sein des comités! Si cela vous intéresse d y participer, communiquez avec la personne qui préside le comité de votre choix ou écrivez à amy@megram.com. Le Bulletin d Accréditation 5